[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [Elist Home]
Subject: RE: [ebxml-cppa] Updated schema + examples
Arvola:
1.
Regarding your point 1 below, are you in favor of doing this now? To me, when we
start specializing things into CPP and CPA flavors, we might as well ask whether
we should just have different schemas for each. And *that* seems like more than
we should bite off for 1.1. My opinion is that we should stick with your
original suggestion of documenting that the OPBA will be used only in the CPA
and call it good for now.
2.
Regarding your point 2, more sloppiness on my part (sigh). The fixed
version (08b) is attached.
3.
Regarding your point 3, I updated the examples accordingly (attached). I wish
there was some straightforward way to allow parties to reference/include
predefined SimplePart and Packaging elements located external to the CPPs,
because requiring parties to define these things properly, on their own, seems
like a usability problem. The XInclude specification looks promising, but
it's not a Recommendation yet.
4. I will be submitting text changes for the spec corresponding to
the *CertificateRef, SecurityDetails, *SecurityDetailsRef, *Sender* and
*Receiver* changes to the schema. I hope I can get this done by Friday.
Peter
-----Original Message-----
From: Arvola Chan [mailto:arvola@tibco.com] Sent: Monday, January 07, 2002 5:56 PM To: Peter Ogden; ebXML-CPPA (E-mail) Subject: Re: [ebxml-cppa] Updated schema + examples Peter:
Some comments:
Regards,
-Arvola
|
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [Elist Home]
Powered by eList eXpress LLC